Is this WotC's pipe dream?

[Alan Shutko]

I can only run 1 game a week. I have a 9-month old and a toddler. As such, I have one main game that I run, and other games I run as interludes on occasion. Right now, that's 4e.

Gee, I have a toddler (yours is older) and one in the oven. And I'll probably be moving in July. (Yes, you're among the first to know, O.) For me, I'm planning on keeping running RCD&D. I'd consider playing in other games, but right now, no one in my current group is really hot on DDN. Of course, they all have their own real-life activities right now that might slow down adoption of new games.

It's really hard to call right now. I haven't had the time to dig into DDN (hello, meet my large quantity of boxes) and I've had few friends who have, but none of them so far have been completely wowed. I know that this can change by release. My feeling is D&D didn't really need a new edition, but if the new one turns out to be awesome and I can slot Glantri into it nicely, I'll give it a shot.

 

[CM]

I think it's far too early in the process to answer this question honestly. Give me about 18 months to form an opinion.

 

[Obryn]

I think it's far too early in the process to answer this question honestly. Give me about 18 months to form an opinion.

Yes, the information we have is necessarily partial, in flux, incomplete, and potentially completely wrong.

However, at this point, between Cook's/Mearls's columns and the various playtesting info out there, I think it's safe to say we have an idea about the direction the game is moving in. From here, it's largely details.

I promise - I won't hold anyone to their answer on this poll!

-O

 

[Invisible Stalker]

Sorry, another quick poll. I see varying degrees of enthusiasm, but the bottom line is - if the final version of the Next rules looks somewhat similar to the playtest (keeping in mind we have no idea what the final version will look like), what are the odds that WotC will convince you to switch your primary game to it?

As for me, as I've said elsewhere, my chief D&D loves are 4e and 1e. I've run both recently, and they complement each other nicely. However, given that I'm comfortable with either game, I have no need for a middle ground. So I'm unlikely to switch over, unless 5e does something to wow me.

Poll? Poll.

This is based on best current knowledge, and accepting that somehow WotC may manage to turn our opinions around 180 degrees.

I'm in the same boat, if need be I can just alternate from 1e to 4e. I'm sure that I'll buy the initial round of books for 5e and give it a campaign to try it out, but at best it will just be a part of the rotation.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Well, no, but I wouldn't play a playtest version of anything as my actual game. It's like taking a child bride: you can speculate, but you never know exactly what you're going to get.

Er...I imagine. Haven't taken any child brides in my life.

But right now, 5e in play is giving me something that neither 3e nor 4e can give me. As a core principle, 5e seems more dedicated to my current needs than any other currently published edition. If this is the bare skeleton of the thing, and the modularity message is heard loud and clear, I can't see myself having significant problems with the finished product.

So would I potentially give up sleek-but-soulless 4e or great-personality 3e for something I can make as sleek and instill personality into?

Oh yes. That is not too high a barrier for entry to me.

 

[Ranganathan]

I want that middle ground, between AD&D and 4E. The ease of use, speed of play, and madcap zaniness of AD&D with the simpler core system, interesting options, and heroic feel of 4E. For me--and my group--that's the sweet spot. Whether that's how the core is, or whether that's presented in a module, we don't really care. But unless one system can pull off that balancing act, we're staying put.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I want that middle ground, between AD&D and 4E. The ease of use, speed of play, and madcap zaniness of AD&D with the simpler core system, interesting options, and heroic feel of 4E. For me--and my group--that's the sweet spot. Whether that's how the core is, or whether that's presented in a module, we don't really care. But unless one system can pull off that balancing act, we're staying put.

Where do you feel the current playtest rules are on that scale? Or have you not had a chance to play them yet?

 

[Someone]

So far I've not seen anything that any other retro clone of D&D can't offer, and the rules so far are cute, but boring. However, since what we've seen so far is quite low level and limited, and the most hyped mechanic (modularity) is still not present, I think it's early to form a definitive opinion.

 

[erleni]

Where do you feel the current playtest rules are on that scale? Or have you not had a chance to play them yet?

I feel like Ranganathan and I think that at the moment is two-thirds AD&D and one third 4e, but when the tactical module and maneuvers will be out it will probably swing back to more 4e.
On the other hand I hope for more AD&D-like magic items.

If they do that I think they'll get to the right place for me.

 

[Li Shenron]

My first impression with the playtest package is that the rules are already quite complete and fine for me as-is. If in next year-and-half they just adjust balance here and there and add materials quantitatively plus the first most-wanted modules, I'll be happy to play this edition.